GMOs, or genetically modified organisms, have been under major scrutiny due to the ambiguity of how food manufacturers have presented their genetically modified products to their consumers. Now, the public seems to have made a consensus, demanding that labeling GMO products be mandatory.

In a recent poll from the Mellman Group, 89% of the 2016 presidential voters would vote in favor of mandatory labels while 77% would strongly favor it. These labels would cover, as the Eater describes, "foods which have been genetically engineered or containing genetically engineered ingredients."

This poll comes on the tail end of the first ever Food and Drug Administration report to approve a genetically modified product for human consumption. The FDA report states that AquBounty Technologies' AquAdvantage salmon is as safe and nutritious as any non-genetically engineered Atlantic salmon, but does not comment on how the company or its retailers have to market the products. It would be up to the retailers to announce how the food was made.

The ruling goes against an editorial from the New York Times, published on December 1. The editorial piece is in support of informing consumers about the food they eat. A major concern was how well the genetically modified salmon would be contained in the facilities. If the salmon were to escape and still somehow managed to retain the ability to breed, it could affect the local wild salmon populations adversely. The quality of the physical barriers to prevent the altered fish from escaping could also become highly variable if the technology spread to other commercial operations worldwide.

The FDA firmly feels that there is no difference on nutritional content between the engineered version from the natural one and therefore there is no need to make those products distinctive.

Recently, motions have been passed at both the state and national level that start to indicate the level of dichotomy on the GMO labeling issue. Vermont passed a law in 2014 that would start requiring the labeling of genetically engineered foods in July 2016. While in July 2015, the House passed a bill that would prevent states from such a requirement.

The Grist sees a positive outcome to all this discussion.

"...there is a basic desire among many reasonable Americans to know more about how their food was made. That desire for information, for better and worse (mostly worse, to be honest), has often focused on GMOs. Now there's an opportunity to do GMO labeling right. If those trying to prevent states from labeling GMOs can recognize their opponents' legitimate hunger for food-system transparency, they might craft a grand bargain: Make GMO labeling mandatory, but put it in its proper context, alongside the rest of the more substantive details of food production."

The discussion over GMO labeling will continue for months to come. Some are already taking the initiative and have started work on how to manage the labels on food products. The Grocer Manufacturers Association is doing just this, with their announcement of their SmartLabel project, informing consumers more about their food, including the GMOs.